Flo's and ElectionGuy's Maps

[jimrtex]

This is my attempt to recreate the 1991-2001 version of TX-13. It was purposely drawn this way in the 1990's redistricting cycle to shore up then-democratic incumbent Bill Sarpalius. It removed some republican territory in the Texas panhandle (most notably Randall County, which hasn't gone D at the presidential level since 1948), and included two "arms" to pick up democratic enclaves - one into Lubbock County to pick up the minority-heavy parts of Lubbock, and the other into Denton County to pick up the heavily democratic area around North Texas University. Even with these additions, Sarpalius only won one cycle under this map.

It also split Amarillo, leaving out the more-Republican Potter County.

[muon2]

I'm sorry, is there some rule of yours that's a pet peeve?? As you can see, I almost used all whole counties, only splitting two between the 1st and 4th.

I would suggest two rules that are frequently invoked here. The first is to avoid splitting two counties between the same two districts. The second is to avoid splitting counties except when needed to have sufficient population equality or to reduce district erosity.

[ElectionsGuy]

Nevada:



5: 54.5% Obama, 43.3% McCain
6: 56.3% McCain, 40.8% Obama

Vegas Close-up:



1: 70.5% Obama, 27.6% McCain
2: 64.1% Obama, 33.4% McCain
3: 53.6% Obama, 44.5% McCain
4: 55.9% Obama, 42.4% McCain

Utah:



5: 66.4% McCain, 30.5% Obama
6: 75.3% McCain, 21.1% Obama

Salt Lake/Provo/Ogden Close-up:



1: 59.6% Obama, 37.5% McCain
2: 54.6% McCain, 42.7% Obama
3: 67.6% McCain, 29.7% Obama
4: 75.7% McCain, 21.1% Obama

[TJ in Oregon]

Michigan:


Detroit Area:


1 (blue-UP): Obama 50.3%-McCain 47.9% Lean R
2 (green-Howell): McCain 50.7%-Obama 47.5% Likely R
3 (purple-Traverse City): McCain 49.4%-Obama 48.9% Likely R
4 (red-Midland): Obama 50.4%-McCain 47.8% Lean R
5 (gold-Flint): Obama 71.3%-McCain 27.2% Safe D
6 (teal-Thumb): McCain 49.5%-Obama 48.5% Likely R
7 (gray-Muskegon): McCain 49.6%-Obama 48.9% Likely R
8 (yellow-Grand Rapids): McCain 49.3%-Obama 49.0% Likely R
9 (cyan-Allegan): McCain 51.4%-Obama 46.9% Safe R
10 (slate-St. Joseph): Obama 50.2%-McCain 48.2% Lean R
11 (chartruse-Lansing): Obama 67.6%-McCain 30.8% Safe D
12 (khaki-Jackson): Obama 50.4%-McCain 48.0% Lean R
13 (crimson-Livonia): Obama 49.7%-McCain 48.8% Lean R
14 (tan-Waterford): McCain 51.4%-Obama 47.0% Safe R
15 (orange-Sterling Heights): Obama 50.5%-McCain 47.8% Lean R
16 (lime-Macomb): Obama 50.3%-McCain 48.0% Lean R
17 (indigo-Pontiac): Obama 71.4%-McCain 27.3% Safe D
18 (yellow): Detroit East): Obama 81.6%-McCain 71.1%, 51.1% VAP Black Safe D
19 (olive-Monroe): Obama 51.6%-McCain 47.6% Lean R
20 (navy-Ann Arbor): Obama 71.2%-McCain 26.2% Safe D
21 (brown-Detroit West): Obama 79.1%-McCain 19.7%, 51.9% VAP Black Safe D
22 (black-Detroit Center): Obama 84.0%-McCain 15.0%, 50.1% VAP Black Safe D

15-7 Republican

[TJ in Oregon]

I'll continue my series of ruthless Republican gerrymanders with Illinois

Illinois:


Chicago Area:


1 (blue-South CHI Suburbs): Obama 83.4%-McCain 15.9% VRA Black Safe D
2 (green-SW Chicago Suburbs): McCain 51.0%-Obama 47.8% Lean R
3 (purple-Far South Chicago): Obama 86.7%-McCain 12.7% VRA Black Safe D
4 (red-South Chicago): Obama 95.1%-McCain 4.4% VRA Black Safe D
5 (gold- SW Chicago): Obama 77.6%-McCain 21.3% VRA Hispanic Safe D
6 (teal- West Chicago): Obama 87.0%-McCain 12.3% VRA Black Safe D
7 (lime-Eastern DuPage):Obama 53.4%-McCain 45.2% Lean R
8 (khaki- NW Chicago): Obama 85.4%-McCain 13.3% VRA Hispanic Safe D
9 (cyan - North Chicago): Obama 79.1%-McCain 19.6% Safe D
10 (maroon-NW CHI Suburbs): Obama 64.4%-McCain 34.2% Safe D
11 (chartruse-North CHI Suburbs): Obama 53.9%-McCain 39.0% Lean R
12 (navy-Far North Chicago): Obama 78.6%-McCain 20.2% Safe D
13 (crimson-Eastern Lake Cty): Obama 68.6%-McCain 30.5% Safe D
14 (olive-Western Lake Cty): Obama 51.7%-McCain 47.1% Lean R
15 (orange-Joliet/Aurora/Elgin): Obama 68.8%-McCain 30.0% Safe D
16 (green-Belvidere): Obama 52.7%-McCain 45.7% Lean R
17 (midnight-Western DuPage): Obama 53.3%-McCain 45.4% Lean R
18 (yellow-Western Kane): Obama 52.0%-McCain 46.7% Lean R
19 (olive-Will Cty): Obama 52.4%-McCain 46.3% Lean R
20 (peach-Peoria East): Obama 49.4%-McCain 48.9% Lean R
21 (maroon-Galesburg): Obama 54.0%-McCain 44.4% Lean R
22 (purple-Decatur): Obama 49.9%-McCain 48.4% Lean R
23 (sky-Rockford): Obama 53.1%-McCain 45.1% Lean R
24 (red-Quincy): McCain 50.3%-Obama 48.0% Lean R
25 (orange-E. St. Louis): McCain 49.3%-Obama 49.1% Lean R
26 (blue-Edwardsville): McCain 49.6%-Obama 48.7% Lean R
27 (aqua-Cairo): McCain 49.4%-Obama 48.8% Lean R
28 (black-Everywhere): Obama 61.3%-McCain 37.0% Safe D

16-12 Republican

[morgieb]

1 (blue): 62% Obama. 50% black. Safe D.
2 (green): 59% McCain. Safe R.
3 (purple): 50/49 Obama. Amazingly, this district has zero deviation. Although only narrowly Obama (and probably won by Romney), it would probably be Lean D congressionally. Perdue and Hagan probably won this district fairly comfortably. Would think that Walter B. Jones runs in NC-18.
4 (red - Durham/Chapel Hill): 73% Obama. Safe D.
5 (yellow): 63% McCain. Safe R.
6 (dark green): 59% McCain. Safe R.
7 (grey): 53% McCain. Similar to Mike McIntyre's district. Lean R without him (this area is pretty Dem downballot), but you'd think it'd be fairly safe assuming he doesn't retire like IRL.
8 (violet (?) - Fayetteville): 59% Obama. Minority-majority, 49% white. Safe D.
9 (teal - South Charlotte/suburbs): 54% McCain. Trending D, but still Safe R.
10 (pink - West Charlotte suburbs): 61% McCain. Safe R.
11 (light green - Asheville): 51% Obama. Given this sort of area would be pretty damn ancestrally Dem, Tilts D. If Shuler came back, it would be Safe D. Rogers probably even won here.
12 (North Charlotte): 74% Obama. 46% white (though that is still a plurality). Safe D.
13 (North Raleigh): 53% Obama. Tilts D, and it's only getting more D.
14 (South Raleigh): 58% Obama. Likely D.
15 (orange - Greensboro/High Point): 61% Obama. Safe D.
16 (lime green): 56% McCain. Safe R.
17 (dark purple - Winston-Salem): 50/50, McCain won by slightly over 100 votes. Lean R, but trending D.
18 (yellow): 59% McCain. Safe R.
19 (khaki): 55% McCain. Safe R, may be flippable in blue moon like situations though I guess.
20 (light pink): 67% McCain. Safe R.
21 (maroon): 59% McCain. Safe R.

Safe D: 5
Likely D: 1
Lean D: 1
Tilts D: 2
Lean R: 2*
Safe R: 10

NB: This is what I'd expect a neutral Congressional year to look like, not how it would likely vote for President as the actual election numbers give that.

[morgieb]

Pennsylvania:



1 (blue - South Philadelphia): 87% Obama. 53% black. Safe D.
2 (green - Philadelphia): 89% Obama. 55% black. Safe D.
3 (purple - Erie): 54% Obama. Given that this is in the more ancestrally Democratic half of Pennsylvania, Likely D.
4 (red - West Pittsburgh suburbs): 52% McCain. Tricky to say. It's probably too far removed for Jason Altmire to comeback here (if it isn't, then it's a Tossup and probably titling D), and the trends here probably make it hard for us to win. Tilts R, I guess.
5 (gold - Mid-Northern T): 51% McCain. Amazed it was this marginal. Did Chris Carney represent much of this area in the old PA-10? If so, Toss-up. Probably Lean/Likely R otherwise.
6 (dark green - Berks): 54% Obama. Jim Gerlach's stomping ground. He'd still hold the seat now, but given he's retiring it's Tilts D going forward.
7 (grey - Chester City/Delaware County): 63% Obama. Safe D even taking into account how moderate Philly Republicans are.
8 (violet (?) - Bucks): 51% Obama. Likely R for Fitzpatrick, Tossup if Open.
9 (teal - South Western T): 63% McCain. A whopping 97% white. Safe R.
10 (pink - NE Pennsylvania): 58% McCain. Safe R.
11 (lime green - Scranton/Wilkes-Barre): 60% Obama. Safe D.
12 (some lightish blue - SWPA/coal country): 52% McCain. Arguably the most fertile ground for a Blue Dog/pro-coal Dem, Gore probably won here and Kerry might have too (so Obama was a uniquely bad fit for here). It is trending right pretty hard though, so Tossup.
13 (Montgomery): 58% Obama. Would ordinarily be safe, but might be close in 2010 like circumstances. Likely D.
14 (khaki - Pittsburgh): 73% Obama. Safe D.
15 (orange): 52% Obama. Tossup normally, but I guess Charlie Dent runs here, in which case it's Likely R for him.
16 (light green - Amish Country): 59% McCain. Safe R.
17 (dark purple - Harrisburg): 50% McCain, he won by about 2,000 votes. Probably Likely R in neutral circumstances, but the district seems a really good fit for Tim Holden, so the district would probably lean in his favour if he does come back.
18 (yellow - Westmoreland): 59% McCain. This part of SWPA probably wouldn't vote for a Blue Dog these days. Safe R, particularly if Tim Murphy runs here.
19 (Philadelphia): 85% Obama. 41% white (but still plurality white). Safe D.
20 (North Philadelphia): 60% Obama. The most white and least Democratic seat in Pittsburgh proper. Safe D, might be close in a wave I guess but even then....
21 (maroon): 57% Obama. Lean/Likely D, but Pat Meehan would probably prefer here than the 7th. He would make it close, but even with him it probably would still Tilt D.
22 (dark brown - Chester County/Lancaster): 54% Obama. Tossup given what sort of candidate each side would run in Philly suburbia.
23 (pale blue - Lehigh Valley): 57% Obama. Probably Likely D given that I doubt Dent runs here when he's got a more viable seat available in the shape of the 15th.
24 (very dark purple): 56% McCain. Safe R.
25 (East Pittsburgh suburbs/Penn Hills): 54% Obama. Close-ish on paper, but any Obama district in this part of the country is Safe D.
26 (North Pittsburgh suburbs): 55% McCain. Would be Safe R generally, but this district is similar to Jason Altmire's old district, so for him it could well be a Tossup.
27 (pale-ish green): 56% McCain. Safe R. Like the 9th it is 97% white.
28 (South Eastern T/York): 58% McCain. Safe R.

Safe D: 8
Likely D: 3
Lean/Likely D: 1* 
Tilt D: 1*
Tossup: 4*
Tilt R: 1*
Lean/Likely R: 1*
Likely R: 1*
Safe R: 8*

Again, my footnote for North Carolina applies for Pennsylvania.

[Sol]

Morgieb, here's an alternative for your WNC map:

[Miles]

My quick take on NC. I tried to use as many whole counties as I could;  the west leaves something to be desired, IMO:



Edit: If you move Translyvania County to CD19, you can make CD21 a whole-county district by adding Madison and the rest of Buncombe.

[RedSLC]

Going for "most republican districts in democratic areas" (and vice-versa), here's a 57% McCain Georgia state house district entirely within Atlanta.

[Sol]

Going for "most republican districts in democratic areas" (and vice-versa), here's a 57% McCain Georgia state house district entirely within Atlanta.

That's Buckhead for ya!

[RedSLC]

Going for "most republican districts in democratic areas" (and vice-versa), here's a 57% McCain Georgia state house district entirely within Atlanta.

That's Buckhead for ya!

Yeah, I've heard about it before. It's apparently a very rich part of town, which is what sets it apart from the other white parts of Atlanta (which are heavily democratic).

Considering how well he fits this area, I wouldn't be surprised if Romney came close to, or possibly even succeeded, in breaking 60 percent in this district.

[badgate]

Are these maps by congressional district?

[RedSLC]

I did a couple other major Georgia cities.

Despite being more republican I could only get a measly 53% McCain district in Augusta:



Columbus, on the other hand, I was able to get a whopping 68% McCain district

[muon2]

Chicago Area:

Your orange CD is quite bizarre, but if it's going to be bizarre why not accommodate another minority district. My guess is one could make a 50% HVAP district linking Aurora, Elgin, Addison, and Melrose Park.

[ElectionsGuy]

Tennessee:



3: 59.5% McCain, 39.5% Obama
4: 69.0% Obama, 29.8% McCain
5: 57.4% McCain, 41.3% Obama
6: 64.2% McCain, 34.2% Obama
7: 63.8% McCain, 35.0% Obama
8: 69.1% McCain, 29.4% Obama
9: 60.1% McCain, 38.3% Obama
10: 63.5% McCain, 35.0% Obama
11: 63.0% McCain, 35.2% Obama
12: 59.5% McCain, 39.4% Obama
13: 70.0% McCain, 28.5% Obama
14: 69.1% McCain, 29.2% Obama

Memphis:



1: 88.7% Obama, 10.8% McCain
2: 58.1% McCain, 41.3% Obama

Kentucky:



1: 65.9% Obama, 33.1% McCain
2: 59.3% McCain, 39.2% Obama
3: 58.3% McCain, 40.3% Obama
4: 59.5% McCain, 39.0% Obama
5: 73.2% McCain, 25.4% Obama
6: 52.6% McCain, 46.0% Obama
7: 58.1% McCain, 40.8% Obama
8: 66.2% McCain, 32.2% Obama
9: 61.8% McCain, 36.7% Obama
10: 55.8% McCain, 42.2% Obama

[ElectionsGuy]

Arkansas:



1: 62.9% McCain, 34.9% Obama
2: 55.0% Obama, 43.4% McCain
3: 65.3% McCain, 32.1% Obama
4: 60.2% McCain, 37.4% Obama
5: 64.5% McCain, 32.5% Obama
6: 57.5% McCain, 39.6% Obama

(I originally just put Saline and Pulaski counties together, but decided that I would make a guaranteed dem district to make it fair)

Iowa:



1: 56.4% Obama, 41.9% McCain
2: 62.2% Obama, 36.2% McCain
3: 57.8% Obama, 40.8% McCain
4: 56.8% Obama, 41.6% McCain
5: 50.1% Obama, 47.8% McCain
6: 49.3% Obama, 48.9% McCain
7: 54.5% McCain, 44.0% Obama

Although Obama won 6/7 here in 2008, its likely he only won 4/7 in 2012.

Mississippi:



1: 65.1% McCain, 33.8% Obama
2: 61.9% Obama, 37.4% McCain
3: 56.4% McCain, 42.8% Obama
4: 63.2% Obama, 36.2% McCain
5: 69.0% McCain, 30.3% Obama
6: 65.2% McCain, 33.9% Obama
7: 67.7% McCain, 31.3% Obama

[ElectionsGuy]

Connecticut:



1: 58.7% Obama, 40.7% McCain
2: 72.3% Obama, 26.8% McCain
3: 50.6% Obama, 48.3% McCain
4: 58.6% Obama, 40.2% McCain
5: 73.8% Obama, 25.2% McCain
6: 55.0% Obama, 43.5% McCain
7: 61.3% Obama, 37.4% McCain
8: 59.6% Obama, 38.8% McCain

Republicans should have the 3rd while having a good shot at the 6th in a decent year, otherwise everything else should go to the democrats.

Oklahoma:



1: 50.1% McCain, 49.9% Obama
2: 57.9% McCain, 42.1% Obama
3: 68.1% McCain, 31.9% Obama
4: 71.5% McCain, 28.5% Obama
5: 65.7% McCain, 34.3% Obama
6: 70.6% McCain, 29.4% Obama
7: 64.0% McCain, 36.0% Obama
8: 74.9% McCain, 25.1% Obama

Democrats should get the first (as its trending D), everything else though is Safe R. The Tulsa district isn't small enough to be competitive.

[ElectionsGuy]

Colorado GOPmander (5-2)







Blue: 72.9% Obama, 25.4% McCain
Green: 70.8% Obama, 27.5% McCain
Purple: 51.1% McCain, 47.2% Obama
Red: 50.8% McCain, 47.5% Obama
Yellow: 51.2% McCain, 47.2% Obama
Teal: 52.1% McCain, 46.5% Obama
Grey: 50.3% McCain, 48.2% Obama

[ElectionsGuy]

New Mexico GOPmander (2-1)





Blue: 75.7% Obama, 23.1% McCain
Green: 50.9% McCain, 47.8% Obama
Purple: 50.9% McCain, 47.7% Obama

[ElectionsGuy]

Nevada GOPmander (2-2):





Blue: 68.4% Obama, 29.5% McCain
Green: 61.3% Obama, 36.6% McCain
Purple: 49.3% Obama, 48.4% McCain (Would go republican in basically any other election)
Red: 49.8% McCain, 48.0% Obama

Both R districts would easily go Romney.

Also, the ones in New Mexico would probably go 54% Romney and all the ones in Colorado would at least go 52% Romney, at most 55% Romney. So read behind these numbers.

[Sol]

I'd be a little cautious about your CO-04- it could reelect Betsy Markey.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I started to work on a series of cuberoot apportionment maps, but Alabama defeated me right out of the bat.  When you need districts to be 28,451 in size average and you have some 20K+ precincts, it's just not doable with any sort of reasonable deviation.  Why the heck does Alabama have such large precincts?

[muon2]

I started to work on a series of cuberoot apportionment maps, but Alabama defeated me right out of the bat.  When you need districts to be 28,451 in size average and you have some 20K+ precincts, it's just not doable with any sort of reasonable deviation.  Why the heck does Alabama have such large precincts?

I've been told that it has to do with VRA preclearance. While Section 5 was in effect for AL any precinct changes had to go through the DOJ. It was easier just to leave the precinct boundaries in place rather than open up the process to VRA scrutiny.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I started to work on a series of cuberoot apportionment maps, but Alabama defeated me right out of the bat.  When you need districts to be 28,451 in size average and you have some 20K+ precincts, it's just not doable with any sort of reasonable deviation.  Why the heck does Alabama have such large precincts?

I've been told that it has to do with VRA preclearance. While Section 5 was in effect for AL any precinct changes had to go through the DOJ. It was easier just to leave the precinct boundaries in place rather than open up the process to VRA scrutiny.

That doesn't make any real sense.  South Carolina had to go thru the same process and it still managed to split precincts on a regular basis.  Of course, we have a law that predates the VRA that requires precinct splitting once they reach 1500 registered voters, and requires our county election commissions authority to do it themselves if the General Assembly doesn't take care of it.  Furthermore, it specifies that there have to be separate sets of poll workers per 750 voters, so other than not having to get another polling place, there is no real cost savings to be had by not splitting.  Generally, delays in splits beyond what the law required have been due to difficulties in arranging polling places and getting the DOJ to approve them, but at the local level, they were required to act and they generally have done so in a timely fashion.

(Indeed, Dave's Redistricting App is already out of date with respect to South Carolina precinct boundaries.)